What alignments are these two guys?

[Gamerlord]

Okay so I have just planned the next quest in my campaign buy I hit a snag:

Two NPCS both members of this organization, the players may side with either or kill them both in a Roaring Rampage of Revenge.

The hook: A angel in disguise as a nobel that helped the player stop a demon cult early in the campaign was killed, the attacker? A group of "Planeguardians" killed him during a ceremony, A source tells them of the organization, but that it also is in the middle of a huge debate, the aforementioned NPCs are at the center of this debate, but I don't know the alignments of either one:

NPC 1: The leader of the Culprits, not the leader of the organization, but the second-in-command who kills first, checks the body later. He hates any and all outsiders, after he discovered the noble's secret he quickly organized a group of like-minded members and openly attacked the noble, not only proudly announcing his membership in this HIGHLY SECRET organization but also openly killing him in front of a large crowd.


NPC 2: The leader of the organization, he prefers to politely and secretly orders the good outsiders to leave the plane, and kills the evil ones, he tries his best to make any and all killings secret, but this latest incident has catapulted the group into the public eye, and a large bounty has been posted on the heads of any members of the organizations, he was in the middle of convincing the noble to return to Celestia but NPC 1 decided to take matters into his own hands. He has condemned the killing but this has only inflamed the debate between members of the group and a schism could soon follow.

I am not sure what their alignments are, so I have come for advice.

[Kish]

NPC 1 is Neutral Evil or Chaotic Evil.

NPC 2 is...harder to pin down (why's he a member of the organization at all, much less its leader?) but certainly not Good.

[ravenkith]

Npc1: Chaotic Evil

Npc 2: Lawful Neutral

[Gamerlord]

NPC 1 is Neutral Evil or Chaotic Evil.

NPC 2 is...harder to pin down (why's he a member of the organization at all, much less its leader?) but certainly not Good.

Well anyone can be a member if they have a level in the prestige class, the goal is "Protecting the material Plane" which he certainly does, at least in the eyes of SOME members, the others consider him weak and too merciful on the good outsiders.

[waterpenguin43]

NPC 1: Chaotic or Neutral Evil
NPC 2: Lawful Neutral

[Kish]

Well anyone can be a member if they have a level in the prestige class, the goal is "Protecting the material Plane" which he certainly does, at least in the eyes of SOME members, the others consider him weak and too merciful on the good outsiders.

Yes, I got all of that. The point is, um...

A group which is based around the assumption that all outsiders, regardless of alignment, are legitimate targets is an evil group. A prestige class based around that philosophy is exactly the same, morally speaking, as the group would be without the prestige class (that is, it's evil).

[lsfreak]

NPC1: Chaotic Evil bordering on Chaotic Stupid/Stupid Evil.
NPC2: Lawful Neutral with Neutral Good leanings. The NG leanings are a bit iffy, but from the info you gave that's what it seems like to me.

EDIT: There's a *huge* difference between "all outsiders are fair targets" and "we'd prefer outsiders don't interfere, so we try and convince the good ones to leave and kill off the evil ones."

[Gamerlord]

Yes, I got all of that. The point is, um...

A group which is based around the assumption that all outsiders, regardless of alignment, are legitimate targets is an evil group. A prestige class based around that philosophy is exactly the same, morally speaking, as the group would be without the prestige class (that is, it's evil).

He DOES attempt to ask the good outsiders to leave instead of killing them.(He ends up usually blackmailing them)

[Kish]

He DOES attempt to ask the good outsiders to leave instead of killing them.

I don't think you're getting my point. This group has no moral right to bother nonevil outsiders at all.

(He ends up usually blackmailing them)

Well, that answers that. Lawful Evil.

[ocdscale]

NPC 1: Around halfway between Lawful Evil and Neutral Evil depending on his motivations for blowing the secret.

NPC 2: Mostly Lawful Good from what you've said, although if he resorts to physical/magical compulsion to force good outsiders to leave when words are not enough, Lawful Neutral

Overall, the organization seems to have strong Lawful tendencies due to their rather rigid belief about what belongs on the material plane and what doesn't. Doesn't look like there's any leeway to convince either of them that "No outsiders allowed" is an imperfect inflexible rule.

[Gamerlord]

NPC 1: Around halfway between Lawful Evil and Neutral Evil depending on his motivations for blowing the secret.

He is VERY zealous about the "No outsiders allowed rule" so he prefers to kill them, plus he has an ego THIS big:

__________________________________________________ ___________>

[Foryn Gilnith]

Yeah, I'd place the first guy as CE. I throw around "E" pretty liberally though.

The second guy is semi-vague. Doesn't like killing good folks, doesn't mind killing evil folks, even-tempered, likes to lay low. Extorts good outsiders, because he dislikes outsiders.

Honestly, I'd place him as neutral, maybe with a tendency towards law/good/evil/chaos if you need it.

IMO, this group is stupid and unethical. Not saying your idea is bad (irrational people are great plot fodder, and material-purists are an organization that would probably occur), but the in-universe idea is sketchy. Doesn't make it automatically EVIL!, but they don't really have much moral right to bother good or even neutral outsiders.

[Gamerlord]

Well in the campaign world there is extreme bias against all outsiders, which is why the angel had to lay low as a noble, the group was founded just after A demonic invasion AND a Zealous angel crusade that BOTH killed millions.

EDIT: Oh, and also after aberrations started becoming a problem.

[ravenkith]

The second guy is lawful neutral.

Why?

Well, the LAW he is interested in enforcing is "Outsiders should stay out of prime material business".

The fact that he will go to whatever lengths necessary to get rid of outsiders WOULD peg him as evil, EXCEPT that he always seeks a mediated settlement of some kind first when dealing with good aligned outsiders. This upgrades him from evil to neutral, since he clearly favors good-aligned philosophies.

[lsfreak]

IMO, this group is stupid and unethical. Not saying your idea is bad (irrational people are great plot fodder, and material-purists are an organization that would probably occur), but the in-universe idea is sketchy. Doesn't make it automatically EVIL!, but they don't really have much moral right to bother good or even neutral outsiders.

You are running a nice little kingdom, fairly peaceful and so on. Then people, all from a specific country, start coming in and whispering in the ears of the people that there's a better way, that this peaceful kingdom is wrong and there needs to be a change. Would you honestly not try and expel those responsible, including executing those who promote violent overthrow? And when the vast majority have their own agenda, how do you weed out which ones are truly there for purposes you are okay with?

It's just that instead of everyone coming from another kingdom, it's another plane on existence.

EDIT: And reinforced by the simu-post by the OP, what with angels and demons both responsible for the deaths of millions.

[Zeta Kai]

They are both Chaotic Evil, because they inspired someone to make another alignment debate thread on the internet.

[Zaydos]

I'd say the first guy is Evil, but not sure which one.

The second guy seems Lawful Neutral.

[Gamerlord]

One thing that should be noted is that this group is the biggest obstacle in any evil outsiders mad plots. demon cults are stamped out pretty quickly and devil pretending to be nobles end up having their throats slit in the night. Without them Fiends would flourish.

[Harperfan7]

We don't know their alignments.

We know that #1 committed an evil act and that #2 has neutral tendencies.

Sure #1 is High Cha, low Int, Wis, or both and #2 is kinda vice versa, but that's not alignment.


However, I would guess #1 is CN/CE and #2 is ...TN? Neutral in some way.

[Paulus]

One thing that should be noted is that this group is the biggest obstacle in any evil outsiders mad plots. demon cults are stamped out pretty quickly and devil pretending to be nobles end up having their throats slit in the night. Without them Fiends would flourish.

Evil killing evil to prevent evil is still evil.

*shrug*

[Foryn Gilnith]

Insert rational justification here

Fair enough. And it's the OP's setting - his rules. I find it doubtful that a single organization of dubious moral character would be the sole obstacle to fiendish propagation; but with the calamity OP mentioned many things in the world may be contrary to peacetime expectations.

I stand by my analyses. For the second guy, liking good people and disliking evil people is something neutrals do. He has an ideology and followers, but as he undermines the anti-outsider philosophy somewhat, he's not too lawful. He's even-handed and not too violent, but tries to get what benefit he can out of "good" outsiders - balances out to neutral.

The first guy... factors:
1) Huge ego
2) Strongly anti-outsider
3) Let slip the secret organization
4) Unashamedly violent.

#4 makes him evil in my opinion - universally slaying outsiders and murdering nobles entails a level of racism and hate generally considered evil by D&D quasi-modern morals.
#2 might seem to push him towards Law, but #3 is a big point in my view for him being chaotic. Contrary to the organization's welfare and likely prior orders, he revealed the organization. He went against what would benefit his organization (and judging from the fallout, perhaps even his anti-outsider cause; but that's a stretch) for the sake of himself and his ego. Such flaunting of authority and ideology for pursuit of the individual speaks to me of chaos.

Why is their alignment so necessary, though? You know their personality before giving them a label. If you're just doing this to see how much damage Holy Smite deals them, that's cool. But your players should think in terms of people and personalities, not alignment labels of Us v. Them, given the inherent moral grayness this organization entails.

[Gamerlord]

A. It isn't exactly peaceful, A undead menace has begun appearing in the frozen wastes, and several nations are bordering on all-out war.


B. They aren't the ONLY obstacle to fiends, they are the BIGGEST, paladins are somewhat busy combating the new undead hoard, and also stopping a black dragon who worships Grummush who has organized a army of goblinoids that could tear apart the kingdom of the white lion.

EDIT: Also, yes, the organization was given prior orders to not try anything as the leader was close to making a deal with the angel, and he also specifically ordered NPC #1 not to do anything.

[fractal_uk]

This organisation strikes me as highly lawful, it is utterly devoted to the cause of not having outside interference upon the material plane. Both NPCs share this goal entirely, thus from the information you have given I must conclude they are both Lawful.

Slaughtering good outsiders is clearly evil so NPC 1 is most definately evil. Thus he is lawful evil.

NPC 2, however, he is clearly biased towards good. He asks good outsiders to leave peacefully while simply killing evil ones. If he were truly lawful neutral, he should offer the same opportunities to both. As we know though, good people should not suffer a fiend to live so I would say NPC is Lawful Good. This alignment would be horrendously compromised if he resorted to killing good outsiders as a last resort if they didn't leave when asked though.

I can't imagine someone willing to do that would typically demonstate any particular "good bias" to begin with though... I could however see him resorting to non-lethal ways of getting rid of them, some of which strike me as entirely reasonable to the character and the LG alignment.

EDIT:

EDIT: Also, yes, the organization was given prior orders to not try anything as the leader was close to making a deal with the angel, and he also specifically ordered NPC #1 not too do anything.

This compromises NPC 1's lawfulness somewhat...

[Gamerlord]

This organisation strikes me as highly lawful, it is utterly devoted to the cause of not having outside interference upon the material plane. Both NPCs share this goal entirely, thus from the information you have given I must conclude they are both Lawful.

Slaughtering good outsiders is clearly evil so NPC 1 is most definately evil. Thus he is lawful evil.

NPC 2, however, he is clearly biased towards good. He asks good outsiders to leave peacefully while simply killing evil ones. If he were truly lawful neutral, he should offer the same opportunities to both. As we know though, good people should not suffer a fiend to live so I would say NPC is Lawful Good. This alignment would be horrendously compromised if he resorted to killing good outsiders as a last resort if they didn't leave when asked though.

I can't imagine someone willing to do that would typically demonstate any particular "good bias" to begin with though... I could however see him resorting to non-lethal ways of getting rid of them, some of which strike me as entirely reasonable to the character and the LG alignment.

There have been times where he has been forced to slit a celestial's throat in the middle of the night.

[Foryn Gilnith]

Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil—after all, she would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones.

Bias towards good people is a neutral trait. It's simply the acknowledgment that good people (outsiders) will contribute to the universe (in this case, everywhere but the Material plane) much more than evil people (fiends).
PS: And he kills good outsiders, so a good alignment is indeed compromised.

Utter devotion doesn't make one Lawful. Is the freedom fighter and anarchist utterly devoted to undermining all authority Lawful?
Quotes:

He hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society.

A chaotic neutral character follows his whims. He is an individualist first and last.

A chaotic evil character does whatever his greed, hatred, and lust for destruction drive him to do

CG can be utterly devoted to his own moral compass, which entails slaying outsiders. CN is utterly devoted to his whims - which may include slaying outsiders. CE does whatever his hatred drives him to do (with potential utter devotion), namely slaying outsiders.

[fractal_uk]

Utter devotion doesn't make one Lawful. Is the freedom fighter and anarchist utterly devoted to undermining all authority Lawful?

I would say its entirely possible to have a lawful freedom fighter, a classic example might be a paladin in a tyrannical regime, though there is clearly nothing lawful about anarchy so that part is out. At the end of the day it depends upon each specific individual.

These people seem to have some well defined role given to them and their own specific methods of dealing with the situation they are in, which they evidently stick to. They are reliable in that you know what you exactly will get from each of them. They are judgemental and not particularly adaptable. NPC 1 particularly has some form of honour perhaps in that he is unwilling to commit deception to carry out his goals - he just gets on with them. These are all Lawful traits.

CG can be utterly devoted to his own moral compass, which entails slaying outsiders. CN is utterly devoted to his whims - which may include slaying outsiders. CE does whatever his hatred drives him to do (with potential utter devotion), namely slaying outsiders.

Chaotic good characters will lose their alignment very quickly if they are slaying *good* outsiders, regardless of their own moral compass.

[Godskook]

I say that NPC 1 is definitely evil, and probably lawful(although chaotic is not uncalled for), while NPC 2 can be pretty much whatever you want him to be.

[Haarkla]

NCP 1 is lawful evil.
Highly prejudiced (SRD: A lawful evil villain ... condemns others not according to their actions but according to race, religion, homeland, or social rank). Quickly organized a group of like-minded members.

NPC 2 I need more information. Definitely non-good.

[Gamerlord]

Some additional info on #2 because you asked for it:

Exterica Detosde, Elven hero, was taught of the Invasion of the corrupted fire since he was a youngling, when a great demon army came to the material plane and let forth all their vicious might, destroying many a nation and hero, until infighting forced them too leave, then when he was 95 year old, the dark crusade of the angels began, he lost his entire family to the purging, he barely managed to escape the slaughter, he understood that his family was killed by misguided zealots, not the majority of angels, 25 years later, he joined the planesguardian, always believing that outsiders had caused enough damage, but he also knew that killing good outsiders would ultimately damage the material plane. now at age 170, he is the leader of the Guardians of the true plane, he has seen NPC #1's extreme views, but believed that he could be controlled, he quickly saw the error of his ways when NPC # 1 killed some beggers because he believed them to be demons, he would kill NPC #1 but that would cause a massive outcry, and he needs that organization to stick together to ultimately follow its code.

[Godskook]

True Neutral or Neutral Good for sure, then. He reads like a guy who would join Internal Affairs of a police department. He's not against celestials who do their job, but he will oppose those that step out of their place.